One of the enduring mysteries is why neoconservative foreign policy continues to dominate the Republican Party and also large parts of the Democratic Party even though that policy has been disastrous for the United States. No one – not even Secretary of Defense Robert Gates – is willing to call the two land wars currently underway in Asia successful and the hemorrhage of more than $12 billion a month to support the conflicts does nothing whatsoever for a struggling US economy unless one is a defense contractor. Yet the view that the United States must use its waning power to remake much of the globe prevails. The policy is in some circles underwritten by the myth that the United States is a special nation that makes it somehow immune to the history of the decline and fall of past empires. The catch phrase “American exceptionalism” persists in the minds of presidential wannabes like Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin, both of whom conflate the country’s genuinely unique national qualities with a divine right to intervene militarily anywhere and at any time, a continuation in perpetuity of the nearly forgotten Bush Doctrine.

The neocon wordspinners are always ready with a glib turn of phrase to mask reality. America is not poised to intervene or invade in their minds. It is instead pursuing a “freedom agenda” and who can criticize freedom? Tunisia, Egypt, and now even Libya are being welcomed as democracies in the making, though with the usual caveats lest democracy proceed too fast and in the wrong direction. Hillary Clinton has made it clear that the Obama administration wants to see the proper kind of democratic development even as she privately moves to reassure remaining friendly despots in the Persian Gulf that the United States is not eager to embrace any more regime changes after Gadhafi goes.

As the situation in the Middle East stabilizes, the new enemy that is surfacing is the same old enemy: Iran. Iran has not helped its own case by cracking down hard on protesters at a time when the region might be moving towards what amounts to a populist revolt against authoritarian governments. But Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Yemen have also opted for the iron fist, indicating that at least some rulers in the region will not hesitate to shoot their own subjects in order to survive. Iran is, of course, a special case in the neocon mind because it potentially poses a threat to Israel, which is not the case in Manama, Riyadh, and Sanaa.

Republican presidential hopefuls have been making the rounds to polish their foreign policy credentials and there is no promise of peace in our times. Mike Huckabee, Haley Barbour, and Mitt Romney were all recently in Israel where they pledged undying affection for Bibi Netanyahu and all his political progeny while Sarah Palin is doing the same this week. Comments about facing down the Iranian nuclear threat are obligatory. Netanyahu himself recently upped the ante regarding Iran by declaring that military action will have to be taken against the country if sanctions do not end its nuclear program. As sanctions are unlikely to accomplish that, it amounted to a demand that war should be the next phase. Netanyahu even expressed a preference for who should do the attacking: the United States. He also stated his belief that Iran has enough nuclear material to make three bombs and expressed concern that Tehran is seeking to assume control over the oil fields in Saudi Arabia through a takeover of Bahrain, which has a Shi’ite majority.

So, per the Israeli government, Iran is not only seeking a nuclear weapon, it is also out to take control of a large chunk of the world’s oil supplies. Of course, both assumptions could be challenged and there is considerable evidence, including the most recent US National Intelligence Estimate or NIE on Iran, that indicates that there continues to be no solid evidence that Tehran is seeking a nuclear weapon and is in no position economically or militarily to establish any kind of dominance over the Persian Gulf region. But the problem is that the narrative being promoted by the mainstream media emphasizes the threat posed by Iran and does not attempt to provide information to the contrary so the American public unfortunately believes what it hears and sees.

Prominent Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz even outdoes Israel’s prime minister in his assessment of the Iranian threat on a recent Huffington Post submission “Israel Has the Right to Attack Iran’s Nuclear Reactors Now.” Iran’s alleged attempt to ship weapons “designed to kill Israeli civilians” to Hamas in Gaza is, for Dershowitz, an act of war justifying an armed Israeli response. Dershowitz also claims, without citing any evidence whatsoever, that Iran might deliberately develop a dirty nuclear weapon that could be sent on a ship into Israeli waters and detonated. He also cites the recent killing of an Israeli settler family in the illegal settlement of Itamar as evidence of how “weapons are used by Israel’s enemies against civilians in violation of the laws of war.” He describes the Iranian regime as suicidal, willing to suffer great damage if it is able to enter into a nuclear exchange with Israel that it knows it will survive and Israel will not. Dershowitz admittedly is completely shameless and will either invent or use any argument no matter how weak to justify any action taken by the Israelis, but as he is advocating military action that would inevitably draw the United States into yet another war, someone should perhaps challenge his scatterbrained assumptions about reasonable grounds for initiating a conflict.

As Dershowitz demonstrates, the sole immutable principle of neocon foreign policy is that it should benefit Israel. Neoconservatives initially supported Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak because of his peace agreement with Tel Aviv, but they have now shifted away from that position and are urging the Obama Administration to liberate the Arabs. They have been pressuring the White House to adopt a more aggressive policy in general, particularly vis-à-vis Libya. They have generally viewed the Libyan situation as mechanism to revive their agenda to remake the Middle East following the model of the Bush “freedom agenda,” which combined the threat of military force with gentler forms of persuasion. A successful armed intervention in Libya would vindicate the military option and could mean that using force will definitely be on the table for settling other disputes, including the long simmering problem posed by Iran. President Obama has been understandably reluctant to get on board, but he finally agreed to take the initiative knowing that a successful Libyan action would be attractive, casting him as a successful wartime president and taking the heat off his own misadventures in Afghanistan. But it would also put him under pressure from the blue dogs in his own party who join with the Republicans in demanding a more robust foreign policy across the board, which would include seriously threatening Iran.

There is also a seldom remarked upon secondary agenda for the neoconservatives as related to freedom for the Arab world. As in the case of Iraq, many neocons would prefer to see democratic Arab nations that are divided by internal divisions and therefore not strong enough to challenge Israel rather than headed by dictators like Saddam Hussein who are hostile. Developments in Eastern Europe over the past twenty years have revealed clearly that democracy does not necessarily bring with it unity of purpose or political cohesion, quite the contrary. Small, weak, divided Arab states encumbered by a number of squabbling political parties work well for Israel and for its neocon friends.

Needless to say, the dominant neocon crafted foreign policy that still drives the Republican Party and that is all too popular elsewhere in Washington should be challenged by every American who believes more armed conflict in the Middle East could bring disaster. What did not work in 2003 in Iraq will not work in 2011 in Iran and if there are no demands for change there will be another war, one that could easily have catastrophic consequences. Using military force as the first option to change governments that Washington disapproves of is a concept that must be addressed directly and discredited. If the notion persists that one more war can be fought and might have a good result, it could be the final straw that breaks the back of the American experiment in republican government.

"As Dershowitz demonstrates, the sole immutable principle of neocon foreign policy is that it should benefit Israel." True, but one should add that mere support for Israel is not enough. Neocons demand a grandiose foreign policy in support of Israel. Neoconservatism, in sum:
1. U.S. military hegemony over the world.
2. Israeli political hegemony over the U.S.

Terrance&Philip

I am forced to conclude our "friendship" with Israel poses a bigger danger to the United States than Islamo-fascism ever did.

Americans need to tell their "leaders" to p__s up a rope. No more money and no more blood for wars of secondary importance to the United States. I'll be willingly damned to hell before I see any of my children or grandchildren enlist in our military while it's primary function remains advancing an imperial hegemony.

Gabriel

I do agree with general direction comment above except for the usage of "Islamo-fascism", a propaganda term that has no basis in reality.

andy

If it wasn't for Israel, America could probably live in peace with the Arab world.

Johnny in Wi.

If Julius Streicher can be hung for war crimes so can Alan Dershowitz. He is some lawyer calling for mass muder all the time. In 1980 I sat next to Dershowitz on a plane for a few hours. i never did talk to him except a few words of .curtesy. He was a famous lawyer even then, but not like he is now.

Bodkin

Calling for the liquidation of people who express a point of view. Wow.

It's incredibly ironic that you think you're morally superior.

The monomaniacal Giraldi knows that if he keeps sounding the same bell, his dogs won't just salivate on cue. Eventually they'll turn rabid. You're the proof.

Johnny in Wi.

Bodkin: Julius Strecher was executed for expressibng a point of view. Calling for mass muder is a war crime. Of course, I was just making a point, but if Dershewitz's plan is used many thousands of people would be killed. The Israeli extremists, such as yourself, are always calling for a nuclear strike against some or another Muslim state as the final solution to your problems. Then you can sieze all Ersatz Israel from the Nile to the Euphartes and expell all the non Jewish residents or even kill them.

Bodkin

You're imputing imaginary motives to me and misrepresenting my positions because of the reflexively monolithic view you have of anyone who defends any aspect of Israel. Giraldi has trained you well.

It's obvious you haven't read my posts, or you'd never call me an "extremist". I've never expressed support for "Greater Israel" stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates. What nonsense! I highly doubt more than a tiny percentage of Israelis support such expansionism. Most Israelis don't even support the settlements, and I too would be happy to see them dismantled if the end result would be genuine peace and security. But I don't condone the butchering of babies and children just because they happen to be living in a home on the West Bank. (continued…)

Bodkin

Obviously, you're distorting Dershowitz's words when you accuse him of simply "calling for mass murder". He was arguing that a casus belli exists because Iran is arming its terrorist proxies and those proxies are attacking Israel. I don't actually support war with Iran, as I think it's preferable for the oppressed Iranians to overthrow their regime.

But it's hardly a "war crime" when a PRIVATE CITIZEN who's not actually CONDUCTING A WAR makes a COMMENT you don't like. Could you possibly lower the bar any more for what constitutes a "war crime"? You'll spew anything, just so you can justify your desire to see the man hanged.

Like I've said many times, and as you demonstrate now, most anti-Israel commentary is hysterical, irrational, hateful, hyperbolic, slanderous, and full of self-serving distortions and misrepresentations. I stand by my characterization of you as RABID, even more now than before.

camus10

Bod, { when a PRIVATE CITIZEN who's not actually CONDUCTING A WAR makes a COMMENT you don't like }

Please elaborate. Is Dershowitz not a shill for fascist rabbis linked with the supremacist israeli Likud or is that just my paranoid imagination

fedupandsick

He wasn't calling for his liquidation unless he was guilty of war crimes, not because he had a differing point of view.

Debbie(aussie)

What beggars belief is that if nothing else the current 'intervention' in Libya seems to say "if you have nukes we'll leave you alone, if not we'll get you, eventually". All our (western)current crop of pollies care about is making sure they get re-elected and how much money can I make, now or in the future. (and as an added bonus how many poor/average can we lie to or kill)
They make me very sick!

Wootie Berster

But apparently they aren't much worried about the future.. since it's clear to any sane, sober person that their policies can only have long term deadly consequences for the US, the West, and in fact, the entire world. Consider "depleted" uranium, for instance, with a half-life of, I'm told, 4.5 billion years. They've dumped a rather large amount of this filth onto the world in the last twenty years and it is, as they say, an entirely indescriminate killer. It will kill them too, but.. they don't care. Insane much?

bob35983

"Come tell us how you slew
Those brave Arabs two by two
Like the Zulus they had spears and bow and arrows,
How you bravely slew each one
With your sixteen pounder gun
And you frightened them poor natives to their marrow."

fr: Come Out Ye Black & Tans, Dominic Behan

mickperry

History shows that the US government is rarely hesitant about shooting it's own citizens when they dare to challenge the status quo either Phil, and we therefore need not concern ourselves with any false protestations emanating from Washington on this account. The current administration has also made it clear that its contempt for democracy both at home and abroad is equal to its predecessor's. What is also becoming clear to many is that Clinton and the Arab despots are employing a pincer movement against the democratic forces that are struggling to emerge within the region. Iran probably represents a huge problem in this scheme of things simply because it cannot be easily manipulated. Meanwhile as Dershowitz peddles his feary tales, and the US mainstream media go along for the ride, all downhill, al Zawahiri probably dreams of the coming day when he can dress up in his finest military regalia and announce “Mission Accomplished”.

lizviering

Reposted. Thanks for the latest gem. Now if there was only a coordinated effort to amplify our voices of opposition to this madness, and effect real change to the current course we are on. A depressing headline this morning that 60% of Americans support our Libyan intervention- can that be possible?

GradyWilson

"One of the enduring mysteries is why neoconservative foreign policy continues to dominate the Republican Party and also large parts of the Democratic Party even though that policy has been disastrous for the United States." – PG

Its no mystery. None at all. That this imperialistic foreign policy has been "disastrous for the United States" is of no concern to those who do benefit – Wall Street, banks, arms merchants, capitalist pigs, etc. They could care less about the disaster they are creating for the rest of us. In fact they use this disaster to further their agenda – ending Social Security, public education, pensions, etc. Don't be so naive. Libertarians tend to be willfully ignorant with connecting these dots for rather obvious reason.

robt

Dershowitz also claims, without citing any evidence whatsoever, that Iran might deliberately develop a dirty nuclear weapon that could be sent on a ship into Israeli waters and detonated.

I wonder where he got that idea from?

August 2, 1939

Albert Einstein
Old Grove Rd.
Nassau Point
Paconic, Long Island, NY

F. D. Roosevelt
President of the United States
White House
Washington, DC
Dear Sir:
"… In the course of the last four months it has been made probable – through the work of Joliot in France as well as Fermi and Szilard in America – that it may become possible to set up a nuclear chain reaction in a large mass of uranium, by which vast amounts of power and large quantities of new radium-like elements would be generated. Now it appears almost certain that this could be achieved in the immediate future.
This new phenomenon would also lead to the construction of bombs, and it is conceivable – though much less certain – that extremely powerful bombs of a new type, may thus be constructed. A single bomb of this type, carried by boat and exploded in a port, might very well destroy the whole port together with some of the surrounding territory…"
Yours very truly,
(Albert Einstein)

I dont believe that an iranian campaigning for the US to bomb Israel would last long as a lawyer let alone an Iranian in the US government even though our congress is littered with Israeli spies like Liebermann and the many others who viciously argue for an attack on iran, not limited to conventional weapons. These people should be tried for treason or sent back to Israel without ever being allowed to set foot in the US again

What puzzles me is how these mossad agents get elected into office in the US to begin with

camus10

well noted baz.

Here in Maryland both US senators are Israeli shills, how does a minority achieve such representation. Maybe Giraldi could list all of them state by state. Lets out these treasonous turds

Die Wahrheit zählt

The killing of the Israeli was tragic, but you rightly describe them as settlers, and all these settlements are illegal. You rightly describe Mubarrak's agreement as being with Tel Aviv, and not as some "journalists" write, Jerusalem, which has been annexed by Israel. The secondary agenda has been used by Israel for years. It helped create Hamas as a counter-weight to Fatah, and this division suits Israel admirably. You rightly say that all empires end, as will the American empire, unfortunately only after much death, suffering and destruction.

In my humble view, America has made full use of the vacuum created by the collapse of the Soviet Union, it's only previous check, in expanding it's empire through those wonderful excuses "The War on Terror" and creating "Freedom". Unfortunately it's managed to pull in many accomplices, including Germany, which should know better and which gifts weapons, particularly nuclear submarines, to Israel. The Germans seem to think that they can absolve the past through being ultra-nice to Israel, and overlooking that country's crimes.
,

Shootist66

Well, to its great credit Germany didn't let itself get sucked into the current Libyan BS. Merkel not only said no…she said Hell No!!

Die Wahrheit zählt

You're correct Shootist, but they "apologized" and made up for that "mistake" by agreeing to send an additional 500 soldiers to Afghanistan. It's very odd, most Germans according to opinion polls oppose the involvment in Afghanistan, but almost all their politicians apart from the left continue to vote for it. It just goes to show that foreign policy is usually not a factor in general elections, unfortunately. It's usually all about domestic issues, in practically all "western" countries.

Toliver

Neoconservatism seems to me to be a continuation of the philosophy that Giraldi himself followed for decades during the Cold War – namely, that America must be all over the world, signing mutual defense treaties, engaging in wars (Vietnam, Korea, Grenada, and overthrowing governments in Iran and South America), and boycotting countries like Cuba.
We used to think we had to contain the USSR and Communism. Now we feel we must contain radical Islam, the Chinese, and Russia.
I don't think much has changed. What do you think, Mr. Giraldi?

RickR30

Oh no, dershoshlitz is now a foreign policy expert?

The second agenda of the neocons is key and must be pointed out repeatedly, and it belies whatever their exoteric "doctine" claims. For israel to be strong, it's not just enough that the US taxpayer give it billions in weapons ans cash every year. Every other nation nearby, and not so nearby, must be weak. You bring about that weakness by destabilizing governments, bombing all of their infrastructure military and civilian, and by installing thiefs and drug lords in power who have as their only objective financial self-interest. War, death, and destruction which is the only thing that the US and israel have contributed to the world are not instruments of freedom and democracy aiming to bring peace happiness and hybrid toyotas to the world. The aim here is genocide of the dark and weak peoples of the earth, even better if they are Muslims and even more so if they are Shia.

Terrance&Philip

FTA: "He[Netanyahu] also stated his belief that Iran has enough nuclear material to make three bombs and expressed concern that Tehran is seeking to assume control over the oil fields in Saudi Arabia through a takeover of Bahrain, which has a Shi’ite majority."

Ascribing one's own motives to one's enemies is called projecting.

Shootist66

I agree with your comment. And to expand a little on some of the hyerbole coming out of Israel and our own neocons, It sounds to me like Netanyahu is just spreading more BS propaganda for the benefit of Boobus Americanus (a huge enclave of which resides within our legislative branch on both sides of the aisle). How would he know how much enriched uranium Iran has 'amassed?' Furthermore, I'm skeptical of claims that Iran currently even has the capability of enriching enough weapons grade HEU (over 90% U235) to make 3 bombs with their very limited on again – off again centrifuge cascades. And this doesn't even speak to the myriad technical engineering difficulties of weaponizing it into a viable delivery system.

Shootist66

And just why wouldn't this first half of my comment be approved? There was nothing controversial about it. Simply stating it as I see it based on what's in the general public domain for all to see if they take the time to look.

Shootist66

Continued from my previous reply: And Dershowitz's claim that the Iranians are suicidal is unmitigated nonsense…as is all the ignorant hype about 'dirty bombs.' Gordon Prather popped that balloon a few years ago on this website when answering a general query as to how much damage a dirty bomb could do. His response was that it would depend on how much high explosive was used. In other words, the amount of radioactive material spread around would be limited to the blast radius of the high explosive and that the most lethal danger would be from the blast, itself. Also, that if the bomb was packed with serious radioactive materials, such as highly toxic polonium 210 along with energetic gamma emitters, it would likely kill the bombmakers themselves while putting it together.

charley caruso

All these anti-Zionist comments must be extremely unsettling to Abe Foxman and his bosses
in Tel Aviv. Or is it the other way around? Goldman Sachs, anyone?

gary

monomaniacal?…big word….how long have you waited to slip that into a conversation

Bodkin

Sorry for confusing you. I'll try to keep your limited vocabulary in mind next time I post.

we, the american people, are sucking the proverbial Israeli "Kock" as if it were the last one god created.

Why?

I for one, am sick of this little racist apartheid state forcing us to do humiliating favors. Enough is enough. Lets throw all the israeli spies like lieberman and dershowowitz out of our country and start getting our dignity back

andy

In my opinion America will continue its interventionist foreign policy misadventures until the country is bankrupt. Only when America can no longer afford the luxury of an interventionist policy will we return to sanity, or what imperialists derisively called "isolationist".

mah29001

I wonder how you imbeciles who hate Israel and claim it controls the U.S. foreign policy really ignore that our current foreign policy is really ANTI-ISRAEL, as it seems that Iran is quite content with what's going on:http://www.presstv.ir/detail/169386.html

If Israel did control U.S. foreign policy, wouldn't it make more sense to ally ourselves with Saddam and the Taliban and attack Iran from there????

Robt

Not confusing enough?
But wait, there's more! It's now revealed we're fighting on the same side as Al Qaeda! All this bombing is to protect them from Gaddafi!

Michael55plus

Let us stop allowing our view and response be a result of carefully manipulated interest totally opposed to founding USA domestic and international policy.Take the argument of the Declaration of Independence to every American in office or having never been in office.DOI is the womb that gave birth to this our Republic and now its rebirth can only occur in that womb again.START sharing copies of the DOI and suggest does this sound familiar.

Siesindauchschuldig

Chertoff forces his cancer scanners on us. Lieberman forces the military to go to war with Iraq. The crimes of the neocons are endless, but they will not stop until they are thrown in jail.

Google Joe Lieberman and WTC 7, and you will come up with a Youtube video in which he claims the WTC 7 did not collapse. Seriously!

What many of the neocons have difficulty admitting is that they are now the war criminals and pariahs of the world. It isn't 'the Germans' anymore, even though they like keeping the spotlight focused on the suffering of the Holocaust.

War with Iran would be a total disaster fo the United States, as most people in this country realize. The Iraq war was already bad enough, but the same crowd that argued for war in Iraq is trying to force war with Iran. Of course, they conveniently avoid strapping themselves into the cockpit of a figther jet or parachuting into one of those places. They don't even guard the border or drive around in a squad car. That's for the Untermenschen, I guess.